ISic000696: Fragment of a Latin text

I.Sicily with the permission of the Assessorato Regionale dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana - Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali e dell’Identità Siciliana; photo L. Campagna 2004-11-16
ID
ISic000696
Language
Latin
Text type
honorific
Object type
plaque
Status
No data
Links
View in current site

Edition

Loading...

Apparatus criticus

  • Text from photograph;
  • 1: Manganaro: [--- proc(urator) f]a.[il(iae) glad(atoriae) (!)]; Buonocore: [--- proc(uratori) f]a.[il(iarum) glad(iatoriarum)]
  • 2: Manganaro, Buonocore: [per - - - ]Sic(iliam), Ae[m(iliam)---]
  • 3: Manganaro, Buonocore: [- - - ]Dalma[tiam - - -]
  • 4: Manganaro: [proc. ? ludi mag]ni, duc[enarius---]; Buonocore: [proc(uratori) Ludi Matuti]ni duc[en(ario) Ludi Magni]

Physical description

Support

Description
The central section of a marble plaque, broken on all sides, preserving parts of four lines of Latin letters.
Object type
plaque
Material
marble
Condition
fragment
Dimensions
height: 19 cm, width: 18 cm, depth: 4.6 cm

Inscription

Layout
Four lines of Latin letters, with guidelines to top and bottom of each line. Line 4 smaller than the first three.
Text condition
incomplete
Lettering

Letter heights
Line 1-3: 35mm
Line 4: 25mm
Interlinear heights
Interlineation line 1 to 2: mm

Provenance

Place of origin
Tauromenium
Provenance found
First published by Manganaro 1988, but seen by Buonocore in 1987. Precise circumstances of discovery not recorded.

Current location

Place
Taormina, Italy
Repository
Antiquarium del Teatro Antico
Autopsy
None
Map

Date

Imperial (AD 1 – AD 250)
Evidence
lettering, textual-context

Text type

honorific

commentary

Manganaro's speculative restoration (followed, with very minor alterations, by Buonocore), based upon a suggested parallel of ILS 9014 seems difficult to sustain, on several grounds. The reading of AM in line 1 seems difficult (the space after the final vertical is excessive for M, especially comparing M in line 3), but above all, the absence of any interpunctuation in the letter sequence of line 2 makes the proposal of Sic(iliam) Ae[m(iliam)] extremely unlikely and 'Moesicae', 'Corsicae' or 'classicae' seems much more likely, reflecting a military cursus; lastly the reading DVC in line 4 also seems questionable, with DVO at least as plausible from the traces on the stone (and in turn compatible with duovir, among many other things), and [---]NI clearly has other possible restorations compatible with a cursus. It seems much safer to read this as a fragmentary public honorific for a member of the colonial elite of the high imperial period.

Bibliography

Digital editions
Printed editions

Citation and editorial status

Editor
Jonathan Prag
Principal contributor
Jonathan Prag
Contributors
Last revision
8/5/2024